First off- thanks to everyone who's responded in the thread. I'm glad some have found it useful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Menhir
Thanks Brian,
But hey - the more often I say, that a prosumer camera is a good choice for people that do not want to spend lot's of money in lenses and lot's time in photography theorie, the louder the people scream that have a DSLR and can distingush wether a photo was taken by a DSLR and which was taken by a prosumer, because of the significant difference in quality...
|
Yes...I think people often want to be able to justify their expensive purchases. I photograph semi-professionally (gallery exhibits/fine art sales as an on-the-side thing) and I've shown images from a 20D that people had sworn had to be medium-format, and images from a lowly S30, for example, that people swore had to be 35mm.
It is definitely true that SLRs are more versatile, and have higher image quality. But it is not always *relevant* for any given image. High-ISO? go dSLR. Less chroma and luminance noise? dSLR again. Large prints? dSLR. Low light shooting? dSLR still. Fast-action shooting? Yep- dSLR again. But the interesting thing is that so many people I know purchase dSLRs and have no intention of ever shooting above ISO100 or printing anything larger than an 8"x10". In fact, I know many people these days who do not print at all, preferring to view on their monitors instead. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that, but you are correct- for many people, a fixed lens digicam would actually be preferable.
Ultimately, as long as people are happy with what they have, I guess that's really all that's important.
Kind Regards,
Brian